↓ Skip to main content

Predicting live birth chances for women with multiple consecutive failing IVF cycles: a simple and accurate prediction for routine medical practice

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting live birth chances for women with multiple consecutive failing IVF cycles: a simple and accurate prediction for routine medical practice
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1477-7827-11-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Géraldine Porcu, Philippe Lehert, Carolina Colella, Claude Giorgetti

Abstract

Women having experienced several consecutive failing IVF cycles constitute a critical and particular subset of patients, for which growing perception of irremediable failure, increasing costs and IVF treatment related risks necessitate appropriate decision making when starting or not a new cycle. Predicting chances of LB might constitute a useful tool for discussion between the patient and the clinician. Our essential objective was to dispose of a simple and accurate prediction model for use in routine medical practice. The currently available predictive models applicable to general populations cannot be considered as accurate enough for this purpose.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 17%
Researcher 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 33%
Computer Science 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2023.
All research outputs
#6,522,137
of 23,973,980 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#238
of 1,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,926
of 288,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#8
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,973,980 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 288,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.